Nil, eh? I bet more than one person said that before about the probability of the Orthodox adopting the Latin calendar.

And you'll notice that the majority of the Orthodox have not yet adopted the Revised Julian Calendar; none have adopted the Latin Calendar. (I know. I know. The Revised Julian Calendar differs from the Latin Calendar by only one day every 800 years or so. Big whoop. )

Well, if it's any consolation, I'm not all that concerned with the Russians...they have their own problems to work through. I'll be happy when a single Orthodox Church makes the appropriate modernizations...though I must confess, I'm pulling for Constantinople being first.

And what about those Finnish? They're even celebrating Pascha with the Latins...hmmm.

I am just a newbie but I am going to throw my two worthless cents in. This kind of garbage was one of the many reasons I left the Latin Church. Most RC Priests I come across 50 and over want women ordained. Everything is fine with that now but, one day one of these 50 year+ old Vatican II Priests could be Pope then its bye bye any sanity in the Latin Church if you think the Modern Mass is banal think of what it could be under a "Social Justice Gospel" Pope.

You need to stop reading Commonweal, buddy. The wishful thinking of the "progressives" aside, even clerical celibacy isn't on the horizon. Female ordination is a pipe-dream. The "progressives" are on the decline. If there ever were a time for a "liberal" pope to be elected, it was 1978. But God intervened with his great servant out of Poland.

You need to stop reading Commonweal, buddy. The wishful thinking of the "progressives" aside, even clerical celibacy isn't on the horizon. Female ordination is a pipe-dream. The "progressives" are on the decline. If there ever were a time for a "liberal" pope to be elected, it was 1978. But God intervened with his great servant out of Poland.

And the traditionally Catholic strongholds of France, Spain, and Italy become increasingly secular, atheistic, and hostile to the Church which the faithful are beginning to view as a anachronism...you sure showed them. The only reason the progressives seem to be on the decline is that they've come to the conclusion that the Church just isn't significiant enough to fight for any more.

Do you honestly think female priests, liberal theology and gay weddings would help re-evangelize Greece or Russia? It is a "tonic" our mainline Protestant friends have taken, and it has made their churches even less "significant" than ours.

Do you honestly think female priests, liberal theology and gay weddings would help re-evangelize Greece or Russia? It is a "tonic" our mainline Protestant friends have taken, and it has made their churches even less "significant" than ours.

I don't know that the ordination of women and would 're-evangelize' Greece or Russia it's probably too late to get those who have already left to return to the Church, but I do believe it would prevent a greater exodus.

Religion in general will no doubt have a great battle with secularism over the next century, the question is are we going to meet armour with armour or are we just going to have our last glorious cavalry charge...not that there's anything wrong with a glorious defeat, those are perhaps the most sung battles in all of history, I just don't see that as the role of the Church.

As for the mainline protestants, they did too little too late...they battled over these issues for decades before making the necessary changes, by which time they had already lost most of their flock. For better or worse, the faithful of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches tend to be less educated and socially behind the protestants, but the march of civilization is fast approaching a decision point, especially in such countries as the US, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Russia (for such countries as France, it's probably too late)...if the Churches resist the will of the faithful too long, it will be too late, secularism will be able to claim victory. If, however, we move fast, we can have a fighting chance...ultimately we're racing against the clock.

I also believe the protestants made additional errors we should not repeat, the middle and upper-middle classes (or to use a different sociological construct, the creative class) tend to lean socially liberal and fiscally conservative...the move towards advocating liberal to marxist economics in many mainline protestant parishes alienated those who were happy to see social change but were alienated economically. While these classes may have had minimal influence 300 years ago in the west (and even 100 years ago in the East), they cannot be so easily ignored today as they essentially create these cultural winds that the lower classes have minimal control over and the ruling classes ignore at their peril (anyone remember the French Revolution?).

Do you honestly think female priests, liberal theology and gay weddings would help re-evangelize Greece or Russia? It is a "tonic" our mainline Protestant friends have taken, and it has made their churches even less "significant" than ours.

And, you are absolutely right lubeltri - conservative/traditional Catholicism is what has grown the Roman communion from 1/5th of the Pentarchy to the massive global 1 billion strong church it is today. They didn't do it by selling unrestrained sexuality, priestesses, or 'liberalism' (also known as 'Yankees sticking their nose in your business'.) That path eventually leads out of religion altogether (not just Christianity) - it is the story of the Unitarian Universalist movement (and other groups that have moved from Christianity towards their position). The other way is the Christian continuity that is making the Global South or Third World the new majority of Christianity - and they aren't compromising Christianity for politics. That's a First World disease. Of course, those who have been to the end of the path know - but sometimes there is no convincing the folk you meet on the return journey that they should turn around...

That, and I don't buy the claim that to beat the enemy, one must become the enemy. One doesn't beat secularism by becoming secularist. You don't hunt the bear by feeding yourself to him. First - the Church will survive as Christ promised, it doesn't have to 'adapt' to secularism. Rather, its survival is dependent on its anathematizing secularism just as it did other heresies. Secondly - secularism isn't winning, it is being replaced - as it is a rather outmoded 18th c. European philosophy. The last stand of the Jacobins is what we're seeing, rather than a 'last charge' of the Church. The Church only needs to stand firm upon Christ and His Revelation, we'll roll with the punches (persecution) we'll get/are getting from the secularists/liberals.

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

.I don't know that the ordination of women and would 're-evangelize' Greece or Russia it's probably too late to get those who have already left to return to the Church, but I do believe it would prevent a greater exodus

Can see this topic wandering "off topic" so making this observation re "evangelizing" Russsians, etc. Here in Tacoma WA last month there was a tragic murder-abduction of an 11-year old girl by a predator. The family belonged to a "conservative pentecostal" church called the Slavic Christian Church which has seating for 1300 worshipers. Now how many Slavic Orthodox or GC churches anywhere have a capacity for 1300 worshipers?? The church consists of Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians and probably others. Someone someplace is evangelizing the Slavic people.

And, you are absolutely right lubeltri - conservative/traditional Catholicism is what has grown the Roman communion from 1/5th of the Pentarchy to the massive global 1 billion strong church it is today. They didn't do it by selling unrestrained sexuality, priestesses, or 'liberalism' (also known as 'Yankees sticking their nose in your business'.) That path eventually leads out of religion altogether (not just Christianity) - it is the story of the Unitarian Universalist movement (and other groups that have moved from Christianity towards their position). The other way is the Christian continuity that is making the Global South or Third World the new majority of Christianity - and they aren't compromising Christianity for politics. That's a First World disease. Of course, those who have been to the end of the path know - but sometimes there is no convincing the folk you meet on the return journey that they should turn around...

That, and I don't buy the claim that to beat the enemy, one must become the enemy. One doesn't beat secularism by becoming secularist. You don't hunt the bear by feeding yourself to him. First - the Church will survive as Christ promised, it doesn't have to 'adapt' to secularism. Rather, its survival is dependent on its anathematizing secularism just as it did other heresies. Secondly - secularism isn't winning, it is being replaced - as it is a rather outmoded 18th c. European philosophy. The last stand of the Jacobins is what we're seeing, rather than a 'last charge' of the Church. The Church only needs to stand firm upon Christ and His Revelation, we'll roll with the punches (persecution) we'll get/are getting from the secularists/liberals.

Right. And what GreekisChristian calls our "last glorious cavalry charge" is exactly what we should be doing. In Christianity, the defeat is the victory. Did Christ compromise to avoid "defeat," or did he go to the Cross?

I don't agree with the idea of saving the Ark by filling it with the sea from outside.

Right. And what GreekisChristian calls our "last glorious cavalry charge" is exactly what we should be doing. In Christianity, the defeat is the victory. Did Christ compromise to avoid "defeat," or did he go to the Cross?

I don't agree with the idea of saving the Ark by filling it with the sea from outside.

Charge! (Though it could be Helm's Deep rather than the Pelennor Fields... things are not so dire as Wormtongue wants to make them appear ... despair is the enemy's hoped for weakness.) As a soldier - I'll charge, given the options... better light than darkness, or 'half-light'.

I think there has often been controversy on what to do with madman saboteurs who try to punch holes in the hull - does one simply tie them up so they can't harm themselves and others? Or does one give them the old 'heave ho' and make them walk the plank?

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Charge! (Though it could be Helm's Deep rather than the Pelennor Fields... things are not so dire as Wormtongue wants to make them appear ... despair is the enemy's hoped for weakness.) As a soldier - I'll charge, given the options... better light than darkness, or 'half-light'.

I think there has often been controversy on what to do with madman saboteurs who try to punch holes in the hull - does one simply tie them up so they can't harm themselves and others? Or does one give them the old 'heave ho' and make them walk the plank?

Right. Even if the journey seems to be as hopeless as the errand to Oroduin, one must push on. The final victory is, after all, inevitable, even after what Tolkien called the "long defeat."

Can see this topic wandering "off topic" so making this observation re "evangelizing" Russsians, etc. Here in Tacoma WA last month there was a tragic murder-abduction of an 11-year old girl by a predator. The family belonged to a "conservative pentecostal" church called the Slavic Christian Church which has seating for 1300 worshipers. Now how many Slavic Orthodox or GC churches anywhere have a capacity for 1300 worshipers?? The church consists of Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians and probably others. Someone someplace is evangelizing the Slavic people.

Bergschlawiner, I know what you are talking about - I am a first generation Ukrainian immigrant and I have lived in Seattle, WA for about 8 years. The greater Seattle area, indeed, is home to tens of thousands of new immigrants from the former USSR, very many of whom are united in Evangelical Protestant churches (some of which are with a Charismatic/Petecostal "flavor"). These churches were chartered a rather long time ago, when these people were still in the USSR. They just grew numerically here, in the US. In all honesty, however, I am not sure that this Protestant outgrowth among Slavic people from the former Soviet Union can be explained by "liberalization" of Catholic and/or mainline Protestant theology. I think a more immediate reason is that a certain part of population in Slavic countries - especially rural folks - were repelled by luxury of the traditional Orthodox church, by all these gold-covered onion domes, embroidery, incense, sophisticated liturgical music, etc. They strived for what they believed was evangelical simplicity, and they found it in teachings of Protestant missionaries.

Well, prepare your horses for your final glorious charge...but I fear it won't be so glorious, much like the cavalry activity of WWI, it will go unheralded. Alienate yourself from society and you will become an anachronistic curiosity over the next century, a trivialized group that is the source of documentaries for the next few centuries...but what of the Church that fails to adapt in a thousand years? in a million years? in a billion years? what of it in a trillion years? Do you really believe that the Church you envision can last that length of time, even assuming the survival of the human race? Choose the path you seek and you will go out with a whimper, not a bang. But I'm sure it will make everyone feel good about themselves as they can claim they are being persecuted, when in reality they're just being ignored.

Of course, we are never alone. Christianity is at its best when it is alienated. Bleed us, and we grow - join with society, and we wither. Christ never called to adapt, but to faithfulness - to he that overcometh... Christianity, of course, is only ignored when it isn't offensive. Persecution comes only from offense - which might include maintaining the iconic Male priesthood, opposition to sexual immorality, etc. (The secret is, of course, Christianity has *always* been treated as an anachronistic curiosity, a trivialized group - making liberal changes won't change that, it won't make Christianity acceptable. It would become just another activity "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.")

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

Of course, we are never alone. Christianity is at its best when it is alienated. Bleed us, and we grow - join with society, and we wither.

Ah yes, we sure withered during our golden age under the protection of the Empire. We withered right into Northern Europe and over to Russia.

Quote

Christ never called to adapt, but to faithfulness - to he that overcometh... Christianity, of course, is only ignored when it isn't offensive. Persecution comes only from offense - which might include maintaining the iconic Male priesthood, opposition to sexual immorality, etc. (The secret is, of course, Christianity has *always* been treated as an anachronistic curiosity, a trivialized group - making liberal changes won't change that, it won't make Christianity acceptable. It would become just another activity "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.")

Actually Christianity was not always an anachronistic curiosity, early on it was the new hip thing on the block. We were there hand in hand with mithraism, if that isn't cool I don't know what is...lol. However, I think your assessment of the Church and hoping for some growth under a perceived persecution is triumphalism, at best. Christianity is not persecuted, it is not going to be persecuted in the western world, sure those who go out preaching on the street corners and shouting down the sins of their neighbours will be mocked, but they will be mocked because they are self-righteous hypocrites, because they are pharisees, not because they are Christians.

The way the ever increasingly secular word views, more and more, Christianity is a lot like the manner in which I am viewed on this forum. Somethings I have entertainment value, sometimes I'm just an annoyance, once in a great while a thing or two I say might actually be taken seriously, but it's taken seriously in spite of me, not because of me...the whole package will never be accepted, it's just too absurd from most people's stand point, a small number may like me (mostly people I knew in RL), a slightly larger number may hate me, but most just accept me as being here and work around the inconvenience by not taking me too seriously.

You see, you guys are just working to turn the Church into the GiC of the world.

Ah yes, we sure withered during our golden age under the protection of the Empire. We withered right into Northern Europe and over to Russia.

Seriously - it did wither. Hence the need for the monastic movement, born out of response to the first secularization of Christianity. The Christian response to secularization throughout our history has always been a return to the Apostolic life. And, yes, the 'Empire' was all about withering. The more 'official' it got, the more it fell apart. I know not a few Orthodox clergy and hierarchs who have said that making Christianity 'official' in the Empire was the biggest mistake we ever made: because it was contrary to the life fo the Gospel. The expansion into the Balkans and Russia was not through power, but through persecution. Russia - the big success story, is not about Byzantine triumphalism (no, rather the Byzantines were ever patronizing - and still are). It is a story of struggle, rather, against paganism, Tatar overlords, Huns, Mongols, Khazars, wars with the Teutonic Knights and Poles, etc. Even in the final centuries, there was still never a safe and comfortable place for the Church - it was always in struggle with the Empire, against sinful Emperors, wicked men who have tried to use, abuse, or destroy the Church. But - I guess ethnocentric education up North leaves out lots about those 'barbarian' countries, eh? Even in Russia, the Church was always brightest during persecution - there it gained saints - the times of decadence are still seen by the pious as the causes of judgment, not rewards for being Chosen.

Quote

Actually Christianity was not always an anachronistic curiosity, early on it was the new hip thing on the block. We were there hand in hand with mithraism, if that isn't cool I don't know what is...lol.

Not hand in hand Mithraism was 'hip' in the Empire, Christianity was the maligned religion of the outcasts. It took the Christians in St. Constantine's army in York to get it 'mainstream', and even then - it was only hip for a short period after legalisation (until being Christian was a boon - but, then that brings us back to the Monastic movement to recover the Christian faith that 'hip' secularized Christianity was losing.)

Quote

However, I think your assessment of the Church and hoping for some growth under a perceived persecution is triumphalism, at best.

No - it isn't 'hoping' for persecution (perceived or not) - it is simply knowing that the reaction will happen. Folks don't like being uncomfortable about their sins, and no one needs to 'preach on street corners' or 'shout down the sins of their neighbours' (and we don't). In fact, the world loves a hypocrite: it's all cool as long as you do it as well, and don't make them feel guilty. It helps them indulge in a little self-righteousness of their own (ie "Well, at least I'm open about it.") However - Christianity *has* been persecuted in the Western world, and the systems that did so are still in place. It happened in Jacobin France, in Nazi Germany, perennially in British history, and often in American history! As one can see happening on this forum - all one has to do is simply point out that sin exists, and you'll get shouted down for 'accusing'. No one needs to be accused, folk just read it in. Get enough Christians (especially from the 'less desirable' parts of society), and when they reach a critical mass (40% according to Shannon Ware), those who feel threatened by them will take action. See, it doesn't take reaction against bad manners (though, that's how you get my replies), it just takes being perceived as a threat.

The truth is - we're not in an ever increasingly secular world. Secularism is very 20th c., and so far it is on the decline in the 21st c. Secularism is a game enjoyed by spoilt wealthy First Worlders who have access to more than their share of food, energy, and entertainment. Secularism isn't growing - technology is simply being adopted by contra-secular societies, which are themselves growing. If there is a moral question the Church has to answer, it isn't posed by secularism. Rather, in the 21st century the questions to answer will be from the Third World: Catholicism, Pentecostalism, and Islam. Secularism is last century's problem.

Quote

...the whole package will never be accepted,

Poor dear. For my part, I can say I don't find you in the least bit entertaining nor annoying, nor do I take you seriously. Have you tried more whiskey?

Logged

"We must begin at once to "build again the tabernacle which is fallen down, and to build again the ruins thereof, and to set it up;" for HE WHO GAVE THE THOUGHT IN OUR HEART HE LAID ALSO THE RESPONSIBILITY ON US THAT THIS THOUGHT SHOULD NOT REMAIN BARREN." - J.J. Overbeck, 1866

The archdiocese of St. Louis authorized the video recording of a Catholic women’s ordination ceremony that took place in a synagogue last November. It then used the video, along with photographs apparently taken from the video, as evidence to punish a Catholic nun who attended the liturgy, according to several people familiar with the case.

Sister of Charity Louise Lears was forced out of all church ministerial roles and banned from receiving sacraments within the archdiocese by an edict of St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke announced June 26.

The next day the archdiocese announced that Burke had been reassigned to a position at the Vatican as prefect of the church’s highest canonical court, the Apostolic Signatura.

Lears, 58, has been a member of the pastoral team at St. Cronan Parish in South St. Louis for the past three years, and a coordinator of religious education in the archdiocese.

She refused to be interviewed for this article. She is not speaking to the media.

However, several people familiar with the documents, prepared by the archdiocese that made up the case against her, strongly criticized what they called the “surveillance” video-taping.

One of the confidential archdiocesan documents, according to knowledgeable sources, was an affidavit giving permission to an individual to attend the ceremony in order to record it. The record of the ceremony is contained on two electronic discs in Lears’ file.

The file also contains close-up photographs of a name tag Lears was wearing during the ceremony. Her attendance at the November 2007 ordination held at the Central Reform Congregation, headed by Rabbi Susan Talve, was never a secret, according to Lears’ associates.

. . .

NCR made several unsuccessful attempts to reach Burke for comment through the archdiocese and the Apostolic Signatura in Rome, but he was unavailable. There is no evidence that Burke knew about or ordered the taping. However, Catholics familiar with the workings of the archdiocese say it would be unlikely it could have happened without his authorization.

. . .

News of the planned ceremony at the time prompted outrage from archdiocesan officials -- outrage that was directed both at the women aspiring to the Catholic priesthood and toward the woman rabbi who agreed to host the event.

Before the ceremony Burke wrote to Susan Talve, senior rabbi at the synagogue, urging her to revoke her offer of hospitality. Talve is the founding rabbi of Central Reform Congregation, a former president of the St. Louis Rabbinical Association and herself active in interfaith affairs.

Days before the liturgy Burke, in the archdiocesan newspaper, the St. Louis Review, also wrote a column reiterating the Catholic church’s official position that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood and that participation in any such liturgy would be a gravely sinful act. “Any Catholic,” he wrote, “who knowingly and deliberately assists… risks the eternal salvation of their souls.”

That threat is the apparent reason an archdiocesan affidavit was required to permit someone to attend and video the liturgy.

If Lears were to appeal her punishments through church channels her case could end up at the court that Burke now heads. However, he has said he would recuse himself from cases before the court in which he is involved.

The two Catholic women ordained in the synagogue were part of the Womenpriests movement, efforts by Roman Catholic women to gain equality of ministry within the Catholic church. They were Elsie Hainz McGrath, a retired writer and editor for a Catholic publishing house, and Rose Marie Dunn Hudson, a former teacher.

The archdiocese of St. Louis authorized the video recording of a Catholic women’s ordination ceremony that took place in a synagogue last November. It then used the video, along with photographs apparently taken from the video, as evidence to punish a Catholic nun who attended the liturgy, according to several people familiar with the case

No surprise it was a Reform congregation eh?

Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS

My apologies that I am somewhat upset and angered by the fact that I am forced to indirectly pay for these evil and diabolical men to engage in their crimes against humanity.

Your own hierarchs would think nothing of casting any would-be priestesses into the outer darkness of perdition, either, GiC. If they are so evil and diabolical, why do you persist in remaining in communion with them?

Your own hierarchs would think nothing of casting any would-be priestesses into the outer darkness of perdition, either, GiC. If they are so evil and diabolical, why do you persist in remaining in communion with them?

I removed my reference to jurisdiction from my profile, hope that helps clear up any misconceptions. But my moral indignation still stands.

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS

Wow interesting topic... let's begin with some personal concrete ideas.1) Old Catholics are more Orthodox as you can think, apart from ordination of women and optional celibacy even for bishops, their theology is almost the same as the Orthodox, they even reject the Filioque clause and have the same model of afterlife as the Orthodox. Obviously their novelties have endangered Church unity, which is a great problem.2) I don't think the RCC has taken great advantages by Wojtila's figure. Sincerely I don't esteem his person as I think he was unable to lead the Church as a true successor of Peter should (i.e. condemning all Latin heresies and sealing unity with OC). I prefer John XXIII for his idea to open Vatican II: its potential has been strongly underestimated and could have been a way to unite the Church (if John XXIII had lived till the end of the Council, I mean).3) As I said on another but similar topic, I think that restricting ordination to men should be considered a discipline established by the Canons. When I see those women being ordained I don't think their heretic. I just think that they're non-canonical. The practice must be established by a true and valid Oecumenical Council. Obviously this isn't possible so... it can't be licitly done by any church, Orthodox or not. When some isolated cases of women ordinations appeared in Southern Italy during the Papacy of Gelasius, those bishops were beginning to violate the canons for real problems (i.e. lack of clergy); they were using some kind of oikonomia, but that can't become the practice of an entire ecclesiastical communion, but only an exception to be avoided.4) The question is even most terrible, from the Oecumenical point of view, when women are consecrated as bishops... while baptisms under their ministry are still valid, can we say the same of the other sacraments? Is apostolic succession still valid, and consequently the ministry of those who are ordered by a woman? Is that Eucharist celebrated by those ordered by women bishops still sacramentally efficacious? Have their marriages any value, and is the Chrism or Holy Myron consecrated by them a valid matter for Chrismation? I have no opinion on this, but still find that preserving male episcopacy is necessary while women priests could be tolerated in other communions and discouraged in the Orthodox Church.

In Christ, Alex

Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")